Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

3 Free Agents the Packers Should Keep

By Category

3 Free Agents the Packers Should Keep

When the NFL offseason gets to free agency, the Green Bay Packers will have 10 guys that are considered to be unrestricted free agents. Question is, are any of them worth keeping?

Like the Packers normally do, the top guys in the class were locked up prior to reaching free agency. Signing Davante Adams and Corey Linsley to long-term contracts was genius and one of the final decisions Ted Thompson made as general manager.

However, that didn’t take all the difficult decisions off the plate. But, considering contracts that are just set to expire, Green Bay has to make up its mind on 10 guys. Players that could be cut aren’t really in this list.

So of the 10 free agents: Morgan Burnett, Ahmad Brooks, Davon House, Jahri Evans, Brett Goode, Quinton Dial, Richard Rodgers, Ulrick John, Demetri Goodson and Jeff Janis, who should be kept and who should go?

Since this is the Packers first go around with Brian Gutekunst, it’s a little harder to predict what the organization will do. But here are three guys, at the very least, that are worth keeping.

Morgan Burnett:

Burnett has his detractors, but it’s hard to criticize the guy. He’s been a rock in the Packers secondary for nearly a decade and it would be great to see him get a third contract with the club. The former third-round pick from Georgia Tech has nine career interceptions but none last season. He also 48 tackles, three passes defensed and one forced fumble.

All in all, it wasn’t a great year for Burnett. However, he can still help the defense and could thrive under new defensive coordinator Mike Pettine. Injuries cost Burnett four starts, but what also hurt him was being forced to play out of position.

Due to issues at corner, he had to play quite a bit of nickel corner, which isn’t his cup of tea. He was very effective as an inside linebacker in the box. So a hybrid role would be perfect and is right up the alley of the new defensive staff. It won’t come cheap, but Green Bay should try its best to keep Burnett.

Richard Rodgers:

Some fans seem to really like Rodgers and others seem to be really down on him. But over the past four seasons, he has turned into a reliable target that is a decent blocker and can contribute on special teams when needed.

The former third-round pick from Cal probably shouldn’t be a starting tight end, but he does have 120 receptions in four seasons, to go along with 1,166 and 13 touchdowns. He also has two career postseason touchdowns, both in wins over Dallas.

Certainly, Green Bay needs to look at an upgrade. Yet, most teams need and want 3-4 tight ends and it would be smart to make Rodgers a reasonable offer. He has a good feel with Aaron Rodgers and can start in a pinch. He’s also a team guy and won’t break the bank.

Quinton Dial:

The other name I considered was Brett Goode, so I hope that gets done too, as long as he’s healthy. But when it comes to under-the-radar free agents, Dial is one. Over the past three seasons, including last year with Green Bay, Dial has started 34 games. He started two last season.

He’s not an elite player by any means. But he’s tough and can hold his own on the defensive line. He has 4.5 career sacks and five passes defensed. The former 49er also had 19 total stops last season.

The good thing about Dial is that he’s young. He’s 27 years old and at 6-5, 318 pounds, he is perfect for a 3-4 or multiple-front team. A deal with him shouldn’t break the bank either. If it does, Green Bay should move on, but as with Burnett and Rodgers, if the money is right, all three are guys the Packers should find a way to keep.

__________________________

Chris is a sports journalist from Montana and has been blogging about the Packers since 2011. Chris has been a staff writer for CheeseheadTV since 2017 and looks forward to the day when Aaron Rodgers wins his second Super Bowl. Follow him @thepackersguru

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (84) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Nick Perry's picture

" Signing Davante Adams and Corey Linsley to long-term contracts was genius and one of the final decisions Ted Thompson made as general manager"

Genius didn't have a damn thing to do with it Chris, at least IMO. I'd say it was more about the $58 or $25.5 million they gave to Adams and Lindsey to stay. : )

I'm not opposed to keeping Dial or Rodgers because I think both will be pretty cheap. But I wouldn't give Burnett the $9.8 million a year Sportac is projecting he'll receive. That's a lot of money for a guy who has created just 7 TO's (4 FF & 3 INT) in the last 5 seasons. He's also missed 14 games over the last 5 regular seasons too.

stockholder's picture

Options- Don't agree on Adams, and to many excuses. Dial and Rodgers -thats Ok, if they can. Burnett- Thanks, but it's time to move on. I'm sure depth at CB ,or drafting another SS is a better option. The option of paying A-Rod cannot be ignored. It's important to bargain in good faith and honor contracts. Long term I just can't see that happening with Burnett. Save the bonus money, stay under the Cap.

Turophile's picture

I pondered the price point for Burnett a few days back, because that is the key factor in keeping him (imo).

My rather uniformed opinion was that at $6m he would be a bargain, at $8m that is the tipping point. At $10m he would be too expensive.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I agree. $8M AAV with a decent structure for Burnett would be fine with me. I'd be looking for a fairly painless 3 year out, and not too painful out after two seasons. So, not a huge signing bonus - something around 30% guaranteed. At $8M AAV, I'd still be wondering if there wasn't a better way to spend that money, though.

DThomas's picture

Chris, writing R Rodgers "… probably shouldn’t be a starting tight end…" is soft-peddling the situation big time. If RR is the starting TE Gutekunst failed to do his job regarding the TE position. Keep RR at the price is right - because the other TEs on the roster are Emanuel Byrd, Lance Kendricks, and Robert Tonyan. Apparently this is a bad year for the position in the draft, so Gutekunst will have to address it in free agency or trades.

The TKstinator's picture

Contrarily, my sources indicate that there is a large number of receiving threat tight ends in this year’s draft pool.

stockholder's picture

Receiving yes. Threats No. A Threat runs 4.69 at least. Can hurdle etc.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Is that a "double secret" source?

dobber's picture

I like the double secret source on my brats at Miller Park...

The TKstinator's picture

Like my favorite form of probation?

Hawg Hanner's picture

With some depth at safety-Dix, Jones and Brice, I think we are better advised to let Burnett go unless its a very low number. The money we'd have to pay him can go to a free agent corner. Burnett is a good guy, good teammate, but he just doesn't seem to stand out like a 9 million dollar player should.

dobber's picture

Remarkably, Burnett's career numbers are eerily similar to Kam Chancellor's...which shows how stats can be misleading.

http://www.nfl.com/player/kamchancellor/494257/profile

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

And/or how playing next to Earl Thomas and his 25 INTs can make you look good since you just have to play to your strengths, but the point about stats alone being unreliable is well taken.

Burnett does have 7.5 sacks to Chancellor's 2 and Thomas' zero. That is probably because Seattle for the most part didn't need to generate pressure from the safety position as much as we did/do, but the disparity should not be completely ignored. Note that all three players started playing in 2010, though Thomas has played 121 games, Chancellor 109 and Burnett 102.

DD's picture

I would not keep Burnett or Rodgers. Burnett lacks production, plays soft, and is nicked every year. Rodgers lacks production, speed, and blocks okay. But separation and production are not there. Both out! Get some speed please.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Unless we bring in someone better, RR and Kendricks should be cheap and thus kept. I assume I am still the hater-in-chief of RR? Even I think we should keep him for vet min or a touch extra unless we find someone better to be our #3 TE. I think Gute's wish list is already long and resources scarce.

I agree with Chuck Farley below: keep the cheap.

Chuck Farley's picture

None are playmakers guys who make a difference so you look at any of them as cheap fill in guys. Keep the cheap

egbertsouse's picture

Signing Linsey and Adams for Top Five money wasn’t genius, it was panic. They are nice players but not Top Five guys and Ted put the Packers in a cap bind. I’m waiting to see how Gutie fixes it, hopefully by restructuring and releasing some highly paid non-producers. If he does nothing, I will have to conclude that all the changes in management were nothing but shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.

Dzehren's picture

TT left GUTE with 12 draft picks. Cut Nelson or COBB and TT left GUTE 32 Million in cap space

BigCheese2's picture

Cut Cobb, restructure Jordy, go out and sign Moncrief (been saying this since last year, not just because the rumor articles now). Sign a vet corner. Trumaine would be a dream come true, and would be the perfect style match and presence for Kevin King. I know the last part is a bit far fetched though.

Bure9620's picture

Let's also not forget about Ahmad Brooks $6 mil more of coming if the books next month than many realize

Nick Perry's picture

HUH??

Bure9620's picture

Sorry, I was saying, next month when the new season starts, Ahmad Brooks becomes a free agent as well, and that would be another nearly $6 mil coming off the books. There is no use in looking at the cap currently, until FA become actual FA, and franchise and transition tags are done.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Bure, your point is incomprehensible to me. The numbers we are using already assume that Brooks (whose cap hit is $3.3M not $6M), Burnett, Dial, RR, Goode, Janis, House, Evans, John and Goodson don't count towards our cap. Next month isn't going to change our cap number (other than an actual accounting will have been done as to incentives, and such).

Dzehen's comment also baffles me. The $32M figure is not applicable. So far GB has signed just 8 guys to futures contracts in 2018, and since Gute was hired, only Joel Bouagnon has been signed. Pretty sure Joel didn't soak up $15M in cap. We have roughly $17M to $19M (minus $3.6M to sign rookies, churn and something to rollover into 2019 if that is desired), and $9M of that is coming from an a projected increase in the cap. We rolled over into 2017 almost $8M, but will only roll over btw $4M and almost $6M. In other words, TT spent in excess of the cap in 2017 because he figuratively dipped into savings.

nigrivasilayesrej's picture

Burnett is projected to get 9-10mil on the open market - no thanks. Burnett, I believe, has 9 int & 7.5 sacks in 8 years with GB. IMO, that's JAG production. The only guy worth bringing back is Evans - he was solid in pass pro last year, GB is very short on OL depth, & they can prob get him on a 1yr deal.

worztik's picture

I agree on Evans!!! Without him, we may have had a top 5-10 pick!!!

4thand1's picture

I get a kick out of the cut everyone crowd. RR should be kept along with another TE that can stretch the seam. The salary cap will dictate what the team does the rest of the way. The best thing would be try to keep Aaron Rodgers cap hit down this year and go all in for a title now. Just remember, stats are for losers, that seems to be the average fans go to mechanism.

worztik's picture

I disagree on pushing Arod’s money out to future years. Pay him as much as we can, NOW, and in the next couple of years so if he goes into the tank, which is conceivable but, not probable, we don’t take major hits with dead money should it ever come to that!!! I am still having a problem with paying these QBs as much as teams are willing to pay. I still don’t understand how Brady only counts 10 million against the Pat’s cap... is that what’s considered voodoo economics???

Nick Perry's picture

No buddy, it's called his wife having a net worth of somewhere around $360 MILLION. According to a report in 2017 her earnings per year were about $45 million.

When you have the hardware Brady does, the wife Brady does, the MONEY he already has, and then combine it with Gisele's money it's pretty damn easy to do.

Not "Voodoo Economics"...Just a wife that makes more than ANY football player in the NFL.

4thand1's picture

So your solution to staying out of cap hell is to marry a rich woman. lol

worztik's picture

If only it were that easy!!! ‘;-)

John Kirk's picture

On that thought... Why wouldn't Brady just play for vet minimum and give his team that much more of a chance to win? What's 10 million to the Brady family? I'd love to learn about how Tom's contract numbers were settled upon, especially under the idea he doesn't need the money at all.

OrganLeroy's picture

Most fans are morons.

The TKstinator's picture

I resemble that remark, Organ.

BigCheese2's picture

Morgan Burnett will be way too expensive for his production. I understand he quarterbacks the defense well but Blake Martinez can fit that mold. also very excited to see some of other safeties get a shot. Intrigued by a healthy Kentrell Brice and a consistent, year 2, Josh Jones (of course). Marwin Evans was playing surprisingly well at year end as well.

Tundraboy's picture

No more than $500,000 for Rodgers., Month to month contract,. Even then I'm not sure I want to waste a roster spot. Whats the point. Better to use it for a draft pick with any kind of ceiling.

DThomas's picture

According to spotrac, the minimum salary for a 5-year vet is $790K. Only a rookie in 2018 would get less than $500K. Advocating keeping Rodgers or not is one thing. Advocating he gets offered or paid less than minimum is another.

Tundraboy's picture

My point is he is not worth a contract. We need to start over at TE.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

LOL, Tundraboy. What do you want to do, rent him by the hour? Oh wait, that has unfortunate connotations.

We used to have a player known as RR
when he ran routes he couldn't get too far
He wasn't what you'd call a rising star
As a matter of fact we'd rent him by the hour

Tundraboy's picture

Ok fine keep him for one more year.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Either that, or I might just keep writing lyrics to show tunes, a dire threat indeed.

Bert's picture

I read many comments on this issue and others which over simplify the situation as far as who to keep, signing FAs and drafting. If you cut loose a veteran like Burnett then you better have someone currently on the roster or plan to sign a vet FA to replace him. The draft is NOT designed to backfill or fill immediate needs. This was TT's downfall. The purpose of the 2018 draft is to fill holes for 2019 and beyond. Simply letting Burnett or other vets go and drafting a cheaper safety to replace him is a pipe dream. If only it was that easy TT would still be GM.

worztik's picture

“If it was that easy, TT would still be GM”??? So you think Ted’s gone because of cap issues? Ted’s gone because he did a terrible job as GM!!! Period!!!! The point here should be that everyone knew TT was a scout and that’s what he liked and that’s what he did and that’s why the team is in the state, personnel wise, that we now find ourselves!!! Why did it take SO LONG for Murphy to act and admit TT’s failures and replace him??? Anyone that believes TT did even an average job as GM needs to take a second look at the rosters he put together and the draft prospects on which he totally whiffed!!!!!! He was a failure, plain and simply... ‘;~€(... just sayin’...

Bert's picture

Obviously you either didn't read or understand my post. I never mentioned "cap issues". TT failed because he depended on a "draft-and-develop" philosophy and he was an "average" to just "pretty good" drafter. To succeed with the D&D philosophy Ted had to be a "very good" to "excellent" drafter. He stuck to his philosophy to the end and failed.

Packmaniac's picture

Bingo, Bert

dobber's picture

Every team uses the draft and develop philosophy. It's the only way to really manage the salary cap in the modern NFL as you need to have a bunch of decent players on rookie contracts to offset the big contracts paid out to key vets. What differentiates teams is the extent to which they utilize other avenues to supplement their developing players.

stockholder's picture

The draft is NOT designed to backfill or fill immediate needs. = When I grew up it was. 17 Rounds back then. The rozelle Rule, Lawyers challenge, & In 1992 it was Unrestricted, as we know it today. DON'T judge a player on how much they make, or years of service. TT did fill needs. But he also created them! (When he should not have. ) You only have to look at Sitton, kickers, and several players that left. Many players that left were not All-Pros , or on the bubble. Most rookies get 4 yrs to show their worth. Coaches , contracts, and family, use to be the excuse. Now it's flat out show me the money. Well TT was old school. Like Horse betting, it was WIN<SHOW<Place! (SHOW ME WHAT YOU GOT.) It's what the combine has become about. Has burnett and others that hit FA,, shown us their BEST? If I draft James he'll be just as good as Burnett. And Cheaper. But if I take a WR in the 3rd, The mistake would be not paying the veteran. Closing the window on PLAYERS to get to the super-bowl. Especially if he was making the veteran minimum. ( Unless that Rookie, etc. then becomes an All-pro. ) So yes you draft for Need, competition, depth. The Best make it to the super-bowl. Draft for the All-pros- KEEP THE BEST!

John Kirk's picture

Any piece speaking to FA and who should be kept and doesn't include financial parameters is an exercise in futility.

If we're playing that game and not considering real world implications, I think Goode and Janis are the only two necessary re-signs. We've seen what happens when we let Goode go...he keeps boomeranging back out of necessity. Janis is special on ST's. His speed and strength are incredible, but we can't pay him a bunch but I see no reason we couldn't give him a contract commensurate to the one Jarrett Bush got. Janis is a far better ST player than Jarrett.

As for the real world application... Richard Rodgers is a league vet minimum signing. Not worth much more than that as a below average 2nd TE and a good 3rd. Burnett is AJ Hawk at S... sentiment is great but there's no impact coming from this guy. No reason to give him close to the 9.8 spotrac projects. At half that, I'd have to really consider whether he's worth it.

Dial? Another league vet minimum signing.

I'm confident Brian could easily and affordably find upgrades for the pedestrian Richard Rodgers and the non descript Dial. Burnett is tougher because the lament has been we don't have enough veteran presence and stability. Perhaps, Ha Ha's remarks were a shot across the bow to passive aggressively say...Pay Morgan Burnett as a show of loyalty to his back end mate? Sure, keep him, but he's one of those guys you definitely let test the market and if/when they find nobody wants them, you can pay them what you want.

DThomas's picture

"Any piece speaking to FA and who should be kept and doesn't include financial parameters is an exercise in futility." That's right. Right now overthecap has the Packers at about $17M in cap space (with about $4M more if they win their case against the slacker, Martellus Bennett). Lots of decisions to be made regarding who to attempt to keep - and at what price; and of course who to acquire and at what price. The TE position will be of particular interest to me because I think it's more important to the Packers offense than many others. And because finding upgrades - even for the "pedestrian" R Rodgers will not be as easy as some think.

John Kirk's picture

I tried to .5 like your post. I've seen that a few times where there's a half point. Is that Jersey Al, or is that reserved for writers of said piece?

Why do you think it will be harder than most think to replace Richard Rodgers? I hope the org considers Gary Barnidge. Our TE coach, Angelichio, knows Gary well from his time with him in Cleveland. Barnidge took a year off and wants back in. I can't imagine his cost being prohibitive even though he didn't play last year because he felt he was low-balled.

DThomas's picture

I think it'll be harder because depending upon a draftee to fill the hole at TE is more of a hope than a plan - even if a poster above is right the draft has a lot of good pass-catching TEs available. (Depending upon a rookie or one of the TEs on the roster to step into the #1 spot would be Ted Thompson-esque.) I also think finding a capable #1 TE in UDFA won't be a slam dunk either. As far as I know a sure fire starter at the position is unlikely to be available. Your suggestion of Barnidge is great but I can see his price escalating: A SportingNews article lists Houston, Buffalo, Jacksonville, Denver and Carolina as teams interested in him last season. With Dorsey now in charge maybe Cleveland will be competitive in the bidding for his services too. There's no reason to believe he particularly wants to play in Green Bay, so he'll likely go to the highest bidder (not that there's anything wrong with that).

As I posted above the roster currently contains four TEs: RR, Emanuel Byrd, Lance Kendricks, and Robert Tonyan. They not only need a replacement for RR, they need a capable #1 AND #2. In the Packers offense I think RR is somewhere between a #2 and #3 TE, so as you wrote above, it all comes down to money.

John Kirk's picture

On Barnidge, remember that he sat out the season because none of those teams you listed were willing to pay him anywhere near what he thought he was worth. Why would they after a year away from the game? I think his price is going to be bargain basement, and this season he'll either have to accept that or sit again.

Barnidge is one of those sneaky signings. I can see him being one of those overproducers for what he'd cost. I can't think of another guy who fits the mold of Barnidge's potential vs. cost impact. This year's ASJ potential.

Counting on rookie impact is dicey at best. Evan Engram was a Top 10 guy, and Njoku a Top 25 guy, but both were first rounders drafted in the 20's. If Gute drops back in Round 1, and somehow can get Buffalo's two picks, perhaps, that's an area to take a Dallas Goedert? Seems a little crazy to me but if he's there at 14 in Round 2, he's a guy to watch. Just hard thinking a guy from South Dakota State will walk in and have the impact guys from programs like Miami and Mississippi had.

That leaves FA. We could gamble on a guy like Eifert to stay healthy. Burton is probably going to get too much from someone with that SB overpricing him.

Another shot in the dark would be to see where LaDarius Green is health wise. Lasted a year with the Steelers. He had an air of excitement around him in that offense and he made a couple of big plays in a game I saw. Maybe, he can realize the potential they saw in Pittsburgh over in Green Bay?

Maybe, hard to upgrade from Richard Rodgers but shouldn't be hard to replace him.

DThomas's picture

Good post. I liked it 1.0(!) I'd be interested in the reasons why some poster disliked it.

BigCheese2's picture

Don’t hate this idea as he is both sure handed and an established blocker. Have any idea of what price tag he would come with? Havent really paid attention to Barnidge but I’m sure he would take (somewhat of) a pay cut to reunite with Angelicho.

DThomas's picture

BigCheese2 says: "Havent really paid attention to Barnidge but I’m sure he would take (somewhat of) a pay cut to reunite with Angelicho." I'm "sure" he wouldn't. (Actually neither of us can be sure of that.) If he's like 90%+ of pro athletes, he'll go to the highest bidder (and there's nothing wrong with that).

Jersey Al's picture

there is no such thing as a "half point" like or dislike here.

John Kirk's picture

Where does this rating come from?

BigCheese2's picture
BigCheese2 says:
February 25, 2018 at 09:31 am
Morgan Burnett will be way too expensive for his production. I understand he quarterbacks the defense well but Blake Martinez can fit that mold. also very excited to see some of other safeties get a shot. Intrigued by a healthy Kentrell Brice and a consistent, year 2, Josh Jones (of course). Marwin Evans was playing surprisingly well at year end as well.

Like Dislike 0 points (0.5 like | 0.5 dislike)

Jersey Al's picture

have no idea - never saw this before. I'll ask...

John Kirk's picture

Thanks, Al. I've seen this sporadically since I started posting here, and have seen it on a couple of my posts. I just assumed this was you...or one of the writers.

Someone out there has special rating powers. Looking forward to you solving the mystery. Col. Mustard, with a knife, in the...

4thand1's picture

half point awarded to everyone.

dobber's picture

CHTV: where about half the facts are made up and the points don't matter...

Spock's picture

Jersey Al "never saw this before." Huh? I've seen this multiple times on this site. I always wondered how it happens, but it DOES happen pretty often!

Jersey Al's picture

I obviously don't pay much attention to likes/dislike. been told it has something to do with the fan-friendly comment system and it's related to ratios of positive/negative comments left on a particular comment. Bottom line is, no one can give a half like or dislike, but when the overall ratio falls a certain way, the .5 for each is how it gets represented.

cheesehead1's picture

Wouldn’t resign Burnett unless the price is right for the Pack. His injury history is a concern to say the least.

Since &#039;61's picture

I agree with others here that anything over $8 mil per year for Burnett will be too high. So I don't expect that Burnett will be back. Keeping R. Rodgers and Dial as rotational or second string players is fine, again at the appropriate salary level. I also would like to keep Goode because he gets the job done. After that the remaining players can go to FA.
Gute needs to move on from marginal players like Brooks, Janis, Goodson and others and replace them with players who can actually contribute even in a limited role. Thanks, Since '61

worztik's picture

Nice one ‘61!!! ‘;~€)

Johnblood27's picture

Talk of players and the GM in a vacuum with no consideration of coaches is foolish.

The context has changed for a number of players now.

Every defensive player is now seen through a different lens and many of the offensive players as well.

Pettine needs to be in on the utility decisions and how exactly does his defense work? I do not know for sure with this group of players. Impossible to evaluate except as an uninformed fan. I try to evaluate as an informed fan, still stoopid, but at least a basis for evaluation.

I have high hopes that if the physical and mental tools are there that Pettine and the new D coaches will make better players out of the fodder we now have. The players that do not fit his style of motivational approach need to be sent packing and young fresh minds and bodies added in. If he needs a veteran to make it all come together I hope he has let Gutie know.

So, if a valid evaluation of a player based upon detectable physical or mental aspects is the basis for evaluation, that is good reading. Other opinion based stuff is just the comic strips. Still entertaining, but I dont make decisions based on the content.

I would add that Philbin should create the same type of shifted focus by moving MM off of his comfort spot.

This may actually help Janis, get the man a real WR coach for chrissakes, he hasnt had one since he joined the team! The kid was really raw and has had no coaching, just OJT.

Coaches can make or break a player, IMO most NFL players need the right coaching to blossom, there are only so many naturals that get the needed technique and strategies for excellence of an individual in a team sport like football. I believe that our coaches have failed some of our players over the years. I am glad Franklin is still with us. I do not know why Moss is. Capers has been beaten to death already.

Consider the coaching when evaluating a players value to the team, not just GM (money) and statistics.

marpag1's picture

Richard Rodgers isn't a great player by any stretch, but he's been pretty underrated by fans, I think. He's earned about 3M over four years, which is decent value IMO. Keep him somewhere around 1M to 1.5M and I wouldn't mind seeing him on the team. He's solid backup material. The Packers still need a starter, though, of course.

Lots of variables on Burnett. I'd feel a lot better about letting him go if HHCD didn't regress last year. Is Dix going to return to form? Are Brice or Evans ready? Where will Josh Jones fit in Pettine's new system? Hard to say, but I agree with most of the posters here. I think Burnett will probably cost more than I want to pay.

I don't really want to pay anything for Dial. We can do better.

If the Packers can't find a dependable guard, definitely bring Evans back on a similar deal to last year. It's good insurance. I didn't think House was any special value at almost 3 million. He's replaceable. Janis will be gone to some team that imagines he can be a receiver. Brook was disappointing last year and cost us 3.5 million. I don't want that again.

lou's picture

This is the first time ever in print I have seen Rodgers described as a "decent blocker", the stats and naked eye say no way. However at a league minimum he can be a solid backup and contributor in certain multi TE packages and special teams, too bad he has below average speed, his hands are great. I will take him over Kendricks any day as the #2, Kendricks showed next to nothing with plenty of chances. If they would not pay "play makers" Hayward ($5M) nor Hyde ($6M) why would they pay Burnett more than $3-4M ? Forget the loyalty and lining up the defense, how did that work with A. J. Hawk ?

DThomas's picture

I agree about Rodgers: The word that leaps to mind when evaluating his blocking is "bad". Kendricks was particularly disappointing, particularly after Bennett quit on the team.

lou's picture

Remember, Kendricks took a knee along with Bennett (the 3rd one was our #1 draft pick). After watching that police video of his flat out lying brother and Marty's troubles in all his previous stops without the Cook singing fiasco he would have been no where near Green Bay. It is hard to believe how McCarthy loved TE's (remember when he kept 4) that now the cupboard is bare.

Handsback's picture

MM does love TEs so expect to see them resign RR.
Dial, he's young and can back up the whole line, so probably resign him.
Leaves the Packers w/ Burnett. Unless everyone leaves him and no other suitors, sign him for a number they want. That said....Houston and TN want him so he won't be back unless both teams pull out.

carlos's picture

Cut Kendrick’s.

Michael Grunewald's picture

I wouldn't have given Burnett a plugged nickel last time around... and certainly not this time. I keep hearing all this garbage about him not missing tackles. Sure, he is adequate playing straight downhill against the run... but the guy takes such miserable angles to the ball in coverage or purauit, he isn't in position to make the play far too often. Say bye... ain't no way this defense would kiss the guy.

CAG123's picture

All of them could go except Dial let’s be real MB is just an average safety at best he has 9 interceptions in 7 years as a starter and I could possibly look past that if he was a punishing hitter but he’s not it’s been a nice ride but it’s time to move on from the solid not extraordinary safety. Next is Richard Rodgers the master of the 4-5 yard falling catch a guy that lacks any type of athleticism and is a subpar blocker (still can’t shake the thought of Kam Chancellor owning him) I definitely see him behind Lance Kendricks on the depth chart.

Royalty Free GM's picture

Replace Richard Rodgers with Darren Fells (DET, ARI).
He would get tough yards and be effective end-zone target.

CheesyTex's picture

Rodgers, Dial, Goode, Evans and Janis can all fill valuable slots for reasonable $, probably $10 mil total -- Evans can probably start for another year.

Why not?

dobber's picture

And if they get beat out in camp...you can cut them with minimal issues.

billybobton's picture

DEJA VOOOO all over again. MB is the QB of the D we need MB

Did any of you watch a single packer game?

The D with MB sucked
The D without MB sucked

MB made essentially no difference, nothing zero zilch

AND nobody is going to pay 10 million for a slow bad coverage S and nobody is going to pay 10 million for a weak undersized LB

marpag1's picture

"Did any of you watch a single packer game?"

LOL. Who is "any of you?"

Nick Perry - I wouldn't give Burnett the $9.8 million a year Sportac is projecting

Stockholder - Thanks, but it's time to move on.

Turophile - … at $6m [Burnett] would be a bargain, at $8m that is the tipping point. At $10m he would be too expensive

Thegreatreynoldo – “I agree” [with Turophile]

Hawg Hanner - we are better advised to let Burnett go

DD - I would not keep Burnett

Nigrivasilayesrej - Burnett is projected to get 9-10mil - no thanks.

BigCheese2 - Morgan Burnett will be way too expensive

John Kirk - Burnett is AJ Hawk at S...

Cheesehead1 - Wouldn’t resign Burnett unless the price is right … injury history is a concern

Since 61 – anything over $8 mil per year for Burnett will be too high.

Me - I think Burnett will probably cost more than I want to pay.

Lou - if [GB] would not pay "play makers" Hayward ($5M) nor Hyde ($6M) why would they pay Burnett more than $3-4M ?

Handsback - he won't be back unless [HOU and TEN] pull out.

Michael Grunewald - I wouldn't have given Burnett a plugged nickel last time around... and certainly not this time.

lou's picture

My guess is before you were Burnett's public relations director you held the same job for Datone Jones.

marpag1's picture

I don't even understand what that means.

billybobton is clearly suggesting that people are overvaluing Burnett. Yet virtually EVERY SINGLE POSTER, including me and YOU and all of the others I quoted in my comment, is saying that Burnett is NOT worth the money and that he should be allowed to walk.

What's your point?

lou's picture

I agree with you they should let him walk. My reply was that his supporters probably were Datone Jones backers. Talk about chances, Jones last year was property of the Packers/Lions/49ers/Cowboys, that may be a record for one year. Back in the day MLB had a player nicknames "Suit Case Simpson" because of the number of teams he was on in his career. Sorry about the confusion marpag1.

marpag1's picture

No problem, lou. I don't think I'll say Burnett is "Datone bad," but I'll agree that there are much better ways to spend 10 million dollars.

marpag1's picture

dupe

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"